Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:26:36 12/22/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 22, 2003 at 21:43:21, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >Let me quote the email posted 21/11/2003. > >it is very clear that the hardware setup chosen by Peter Berger is what you >referred to as: It's a moot point anyway. Crafty won so get over it... Yes, I apparently said that. I didn't remember doing so, but that's life. Sorry to disappoint you. By the way, the other night on ICC you made the statement "Let me beat up on Crafty even without using a book." Someone said you claimed to be using an 8-way itanium against my dual xeon. How did that go? :) Your statements are generally much worse than mine, but you can't back 'em up at all which makes 'em worse... I could post your _exact_ words in channel 64 if you want. Crafty logs _everything_ that goes on in channel 64, channel 211, and all kibitzes. You might want to remember that in the future, and tone down your rhetoric? I also saw the nonsense about "Hyatt only lets me play one game which will boost his rating..." From someone that ought to know how the xboard done=0 and done=1 flags work. I am using _all_ 6-piece tables, because Eugene asked me to test the new code thoroughly. It takes 8-10 seconds to initialize. If you try to rematch too quickly, xboard says "I'm not quite ready ..." No, it wasn't done for your benefit. _everybody_ knows how that works, except, apparently, you. Note also that if I was trying to maximize my rating, I would have had "autorematch" enabled when playing you. :) > >"If it loses I should obviously retire from computer chess due to gross >incompetence. It will fortell of things to come with 100X time odds, >although I am sure some will expect to lose even it it wins with 10x." > >The entire posting below again: >------------------------------------ >Subject: Re: Junior - Crafty NPS Challenge - a user experiment >From: Robert Hyatt >E-mail: hyatt@crafty.cis.uab.edu >Message Number: 329280 >Date: November 21, 2003 at 18:24:42 > In Reply to: Re: Junior - Crafty NPS Challenge - a user experiment > Message ID: 329267 > Posted by: Joachim Rang > At: joachim@iwanuschka.de > On: November 21, 2003 at 18:05:55 > >On November 21, 2003 at 18:05:55, Joachim Rang wrote: > >>On November 21, 2003 at 16:47:52, Peter Berger wrote: >> >>>Following recent heated discussions I'd love to do a little testmatch. There are >>>different versions of the challenge online - I chose one that I can kind of >>>simulate myself with slower hardware. >>> >>>Junior 8.0.0.2 will play on a P233MMX, 32 MB RAM. >>>Crafty 19.4 will play on a PIV2.0GHz notebook, 1GHz RAM. >>> >>>Time control will be game in 2 hours with 10 seconds increment/move. The match >>>will be done like older FIDE world championship matches - the first one to win 6 >>>games wins the match, draws won't count. >>> >>>Junior uses 16MB Hash, 3+4 men tablebases, 1MB cache, junior8.ctg. >>>Crafty uses 384MB Hash, 64MB hashp, 3+4 men tablebases, 32MB cache, own book, >>>aware of playing a computer. >>> >>>Compairing setups with Crafty bench (hash 12M, hashp 3M, cache 1M on the slower >>>one) suggests a speed difference factor of about 10.5 in raw nodes per seconds >>>and 11.0 in "SMP time to-ply-measurement" between the two computers. >>>As the Junior Mark doesn't work on the slower one and Junior chooses to search >>>different depths on both in the starting position, I can't really give a number. >>>The difference seems to be slightly lower for Junior though, sth like 9.0 maybe. >>> >>>Saying that the faster computer is about 10 times faster shouldn't be too wrong. >>> >>>That's also clearly an upper-bound for faster hardware Crafty could reasonably >>>come up to compete with against a single-CPU opponent in a current competition >>>on fast computers IMHO - the speedup demands 16 CPUs I guess, and I don't know >>>if Crafty can really scale that well. >>> >>>With this setup Crafty should be the clear favourite I suppose. >>> >>>Crafty won the toss and will have the white pieces in the first game. >>> >>>Peter >> >> >>nice test indeed. I think crafty will win. >> >>regards Joachim > >If it loses I should obviously retire from computer chess due to gross >incompetence. It will fortell of things to come with 100X time odds, >although I am sure some will expect to lose even it it wins with 10x. > > > >On December 22, 2003 at 00:08:09, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On December 21, 2003 at 23:03:40, Slater Wold wrote: >> >>>On December 21, 2003 at 22:43:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On December 21, 2003 at 16:25:22, Peter Berger wrote: >>>> >>>>>For information about setup and rules: >>>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?336001 >>>>> >>>>>I always thought comments with hindsight are for whimps. >>>>> >>>>>Unfortunately this will make yours truly look a little silly - ah well. It's >>>>>probably time to think about getting another commentator anyway. >>>>> >>>>>Junior, bold and stubborn, again decides to repeat the C92 line involving the >>>>>rather pointless pawn sac discussed before. Crafty repeats the promising line >>>>>from game 14. Junior varies with 29. Qh5 this time. Soon an equal position is >>>>>reached as Crafty's initial inititative didn't bring up anything real. >>>>> >>>>>The operator, lazily thinking about doing the report about yet another C92 draw, >>>>>enters the moves on the board, 59. ...c2 included, just to suddenly wake up. >>>>>Isn't black maybe in serious trouble by now? >>>>> >>>>>With the queens trade at move 61 he thinks: not really. After all the rook pawn >>>>>in this opposite bishops endgame has the wrong colour, no real danger at all. >>>>> >>>>>The rest is silence. Embarassing for humble me .. >>>>> >>>>>What to learn? Don't mess with the Israelian ex-worldchampion maybe? >>>>> >>>>>For the match itself it's certainly the most interesting result though, reaching >>>>>the (rather unexpected here) climax. What will happen next ? Will the good >>>>>professor really have to resign ? >>>> >>>> >>>>I'm not sure what that means. :) (will the good professor really have to >>>>resign?) >>> >>>You said that if Crafty didn't win this match, you should retire from computer >>>chess all together. :) >> >> >>No. the 100:1 match. I didn't say much about this 8:1 or 10:1 stuff at all.
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.